Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

None.

None.

Members highlighted that Councillor Higgins had been listed twice in the minutes under Members present.

Members also noted that item 80 had been listed as Yiewsley ward but was in fact in Colham & Cowley ward.

RESOLVED: That the minutes from the meeting on 11 April 2024 be approved, subject to the above amendments.

None.

It was confirmed that all items would be heard in Part I.

Erection of 6 dwellings with new access to Foxdell and erection of 3 dwellings with new access to Dene Road with associated landscaping and parking.

Recommendation: Approval with s106 legal agreement

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Erection of 6 dwellings with new access to Foxdell and erection of 3 dwellings with new access to Dene Road with associated landscaping and parking.

Officers presented the application and drew Members’ attention to the addendum, which noted that there were some revised drawings. There was also a minor alteration to include the proposed crossover, and a Heads of Term for managing the implementation of the legal agreement. There was also some amended wording to the construction management plan.

Officers highlighted some verbal updates. Since the publication of the addendum report, officers had received two additional representations. The first was from David Simmonds CBE MP, who noted that residents had raised issues with existing construction works taking place near the site which had rendered Dene Road inaccessible by residents and minivans collecting students from the nearby RNIB Sunshine House School. Concerns had also been raised with the proposed access from Foxdell given the sighting of the tree. The MP would like these matters taken into consideration.

A second representation had been received from a neighbouring resident which identified minor inconsistencies and labelling between the proposed site plan and the floor and elevation plans for the proposed terrace dwellings of No. 7-9. It also raised concerns with the loss of light to the downstairs hall at No. 1 Foxdell. Neighbouring amenity was addressed within the committee report. As this was not a habitable room, any impact would be acceptable. On the inconsistencies in the plans, it was confirmed that the first-floor windows on the side elevation that faced No. 1 Foxdell would be obscured glazed as per the condition.

Two petitions had been received in objection to the application.

The first lead petitioner addressed the Committee and made the following points:

• This petition reflected the concerns of many residents in the Dene Road area, over 30 of whom signed the petition in a matter of days, showing the strong objections to this application.
• This statement was fully supported by the Northwood and Dene Road Residents Associations, representing 120 households.
• This was an impact statement from long-term and permanent residents.
• Since 2022, the application had changed little in its character and impact on neighbouring homes.
• The two single dwellings were substantially larger than the plots for the multiple dwellings and existing houses, calling into question future intentions of remaining single dwellings.
• The affordable housing contribution of £136,750 was inadequate if meant to be equivalent to 35% of homes as per regulations.
• It was not clear why any form of access via Foxdell was required due to there being several hundred yards of frontage both along Dene Road and within the single property plot.
• The property within 17 Dene Road was set well back from the fence with a long driveway to reach the front door. There were large double gates already in place in the plot that could be used for access for all nine developments and ample land to create a comfortable building site base and safe access route  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

Alteration to car parking layout, resurfacing and expansion of hardstanding. Installation of a sunken paving area with pergola and a standalone outbuilding for WC and store. Installation of a staff cycle shelter. Erection of a boundary fence and planting against Field End Road. Various landscape planting and paving to external pergola sitting area. (Application for Planning Permission)

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Alteration to car parking layout, resurfacing and expansion of hardstanding. Installation of a sunken paving area with pergola and a standalone outbuilding for WC and store. Installation of a staff cycle shelter. Erection of a boundary fence and planting against Field End Road. Various landscape planting and paving to external pergola sitting area. (Application for Planning Permission)

Officers presented items 7 and 8 together.

Since the submission both applications had been appealed to the planning inspectorate on non-determination grounds. Therefore, a planning decision will be made through the planning appeal process rather than via the Committee. Officers were, however, presenting their recommendation that will be brought forward within the forthcoming appeal.

Officers highlighted the addendum, noting that since the publication of the report, a pre-Committee site inspection had been undertaken by officers who noted that there appeared to be further landscaping work within the site cartilage which did not form part of the information submitted. It was also noted that the first reason for refusal included cumulative impact of the proposed landscaping, as such no amendments were necessary to the recommendation.

Officers recommended three reasons for refusal for the full application, on design, highways and landscaping grounds.

For the listed building consent, it would be a reason for refusal on design grounds.

Members noted their disappointment that this application was going to appeal before even coming to the Planning Committee. Members agreed with officers’ concerns. This was a vey old building that needed to be protected. There were also issues around the design and information missing from the application.

Members further noted that the application was out of character with the area.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused, as per officer’s recommendations.

Alteration to car parking layout, resurfacing and expansion of hardstanding. Installation of a sunken paving area with pergola and a standalone outbuilding for WC and store. Installation of a staff cycle shelter. Erection of a boundary fence and planting against Field End Road. Various landscape planting and paving to external pergola sitting area. (Application for Listed Building Consent)

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Officers presented items 7 and 8 together.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused, as per officer’s recommendations.

Erection of a single storey building at second floor terrace level within existing pergola to provide ancillary gym studio for residents, along with supporting condenser unit (amended drawings)

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Officers highlighted the addendum, which included amendments to two conditions and two new conditions which sought to minimise potential impacts arising from the development in terms of noise, traffic and parking disturbance.

It was noted that the application had been brought to Committee as a result of a Councillor request.

Members highlighted a minor error in the report where it stated that the premises shall not be used except between Monday to Sunday. The addendum clarified that the premises shall not be used except between 0600 and 2300, Mondays - Sundays, Public or Bank Holidays.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, as per officer’s recommendations.

Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 2no. semi-detached properties with associated works

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Officers presented the application, highlighted the addendum which contained a further recommended condition on the use of the dwellings for social rented housing.

The application was brought to Committee as the building was Council-owned.

Members noted the need for more housing in the borough.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, as per officer’s recommendations.

Retention of single storey side extension and external rear alterations

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Officers presented the application and noted that this was another Council-owned application.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, as per officer’s recommendations.